Canon 1200D vs Leica M-E Typ 240

The Canon EOS 1200D (called Canon T5 in some regions) and the Leica M-E (Typ 240) are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in February 2014 and June 2019. The 1200D is a DSLR, while the M-E Typ 240 is a rangefinder-style mirrorless camera. The cameras are based on an APS-C (1200D) and a full frame (M-E Typ 240) sensor. The Canon has a resolution of 17.9 megapixels, whereas the Leica provides 23.7 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Canon 1200D		Leica M-E Typ 240
Digital single lens reflex		Rangefinder camera
Canon EF mount lenses		Leica M mount lenses
17.9 MP, APS-C Sensor		23.7 MP, Full Frame Sensor
1080/30p Video		1080/25p Video
ISO 100-6400 (100-12800)		ISO 200-6400
Optical viewfinder		Optical viewfinder
3.0" LCD, 460k dots		3.0" LCD, 920k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
3 shutter flaps per second		3 shutter flaps per second
Not weather sealed		Weathersealed body
130 x 100 x 78 mm, 480 g		139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Canon EOS 1200D and the Leica M-E (Typ 240)? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Canon 1200D and the Leica M-E Typ 240 is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Leica M-E Typ 240 is notably smaller (14 percent) than the Canon 1200D. However, the M-E Typ 240 is substantially heavier (42 percent) than the 1200D. It is noteworthy in this context that the M-E Typ 240 is splash and dust-proof, while the 1200D does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. A larger imaging sensor will tend to go along with bigger and heavier lenses, although exceptions exist. You can compare the optics available for the two cameras in the Canon EF Lens Catalog (1200D) and the Leica M Lens Catalog (M-E Typ 240).

The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, just click on the right or left arrow next to the camera that you would like to inspect. Alternatively, you can also use the CAM-parator to select your camera combination among a larger number of options.

Camera Body Specifications

	Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life (CIPA)	Weather Sealing (yes/no)	Camera Launch (announced)	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price (USD)	Used Price (USD)	Camera Model
	Canon 1200D»	130 mm	100 mm	78 mm	480 g	500	n	Feb 2014	449	-		Canon 1200D
	Leica M-E Typ 240«	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	..	Y	Jun 2019	3,999			Leica M-E Typ 240
	Canon 4000D« »	129 mm	102 mm	77 mm	436 g	500	n	Feb 2018	399			Canon 4000D
	Canon 1300D« »	129 mm	101 mm	78 mm	485 g	500	n	Mar 2016	449	-		Canon 1300D
	Canon 750D« »	132 mm	101 mm	78 mm	555 g	440	n	Feb 2015	749	-		Canon 750D
	Canon 760D« »	132 mm	101 mm	78 mm	565 g	440	n	Feb 2015	649	-		Canon 760D
	Canon G9 X« »	98 mm	58 mm	31 mm	209 g	220	n	Oct 2015	529	-		Canon G9 X
	Canon M10« »	108 mm	67 mm	35 mm	301 g	255	n	Oct 2015	499	-		Canon M10
	Canon 100D« »	117 mm	91 mm	69 mm	407 g	380	n	Mar 2013	549	-		Canon 100D
	Canon 700D« »	133 mm	100 mm	79 mm	580 g	440	n	Mar 2013	649	-		Canon 700D
	Canon 650D« »	133 mm	100 mm	79 mm	575 g	440	n	Jun 2012	849	-		Canon 650D
	Canon 1100D« »	130 mm	100 mm	78 mm	495 g	700	n	Feb 2011	449	-		Canon 1100D
	Leica M10-P« »	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Aug 2018	7,995			Leica M10-P
	Leica M10« »	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jan 2017	6,595			Leica M10
	Leica M Typ 262« »	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	..	Y	Nov 2015	5,195	-		Leica M Typ 262
	Leica Q Typ 116« »	130 mm	80 mm	93 mm	640 g	300	n	Jun 2015	4,249	-		Leica Q Typ 116
	Leica M Typ 240« »	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	..	Y	Sep 2012	6,950	-		Leica M Typ 240
Convert to Imperial
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.

The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The 1200D was launched at a markedly lower price (by 89 percent) than the M-E Typ 240, which puts it into a different market segment. Normally, street prices remain initially close to the MSRP, but after a couple of months, the first discounts appear. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down.

Sensor comparison

The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. A large sensor will tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixel-units in a sensor of the same technological generation. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Canon 1200D features an APS-C sensor and the Leica M-E Typ 240 a full frame sensor. The sensor area in the M-E Typ 240 is 158 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.6 and 1.0. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.

With 23.7MP, the M-E Typ 240 offers a higher resolution than the 1200D (17.9MP), but the M-E Typ 240 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 4.31μm for the 1200D) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the M-E Typ 240 is a much more recent model (by 5 years and 4 months) than the 1200D, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units.

The resolution advantage of the Leica M-E Typ 240 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the M-E Typ 240 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 29.8 x 19.9 inch or 75.6 x 50.5 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 23.8 x 15.9 inch or 60.5 x 40.4 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 19.8 x 13.3 inch or 50.4 x 33.7 cm. The corresponding values for the Canon 1200D are 25.9 x 17.3 inch or 65.8 x 43.9 cm for good quality, 20.7 x 13.8 inch or 52.7 x 35.1 cm for very good quality, and 17.3 x 11.5 inch or 43.9 x 29.3 cm for excellent quality prints.

The Canon EOS 1200D has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 6400, which can be extended to ISO 100-12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Leica M-E (Typ 240) are ISO 200 to ISO 6400, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 100-6400.

For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the 1200D provides a higher frame rate than the M-E Typ 240. It can shoot video footage at 1080/30p, while the Leica is limited to 1080/25p.

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The 1200D and the M-E Typ 240 are similar in the sense that both have an optical viewfinder. The latter is useful for getting a clear image for framing even in brightly lit environments. The viewfinder in the M-E Typ 240 offers a wider field of view (100%) than the one in the 1200D (95%), so that a larger proportion of the captured image is visible in the finder. In addition, the viewfinder of the M-E Typ 240 has a higher magnification (0.68x vs 0.50x), so that the size of the image transmitted appears closer to the size seen with the naked human eye. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Canon 1200D and Leica M-E Typ 240 along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

One difference between the cameras concerns the presence of an on-board flash. The 1200D has one, while the M-E Typ 240 does not. While the built-in flash of the 1200D is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the 1200D and the M-E Typ 240 write their files to SDXC cards. The M-E Typ 240 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the 1200D cannot take advantage of Ultra High Speed SD cards.

Connectivity comparison

For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Canon EOS 1200D and Leica M-E (Typ 240) and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

The M-E Typ 240 is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Leica. In contrast, the 1200D has been discontinued (but it can be found pre-owned on eBay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the 1200D was succeeded by the Canon 1300D. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Canon and Leica websites.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Canon 1200D and the Leica M-E Typ 240? Which camera is better? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

Advantages of the Canon EOS 1200D:

• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/30p versus 1080/25p).
• Less heavy: Is lighter (by 200g or 29 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
• Easier fill-in: Is equipped with a small onboard flash to brighten deep shadow areas.
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (89 percent cheaper at launch).
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in February 2014).

Arguments in favor of the Leica M-E (Typ 240):

• More detail: Has more megapixels (23.7 vs 17.9MP), which boosts linear resolution by 15%.
• Better image quality: Is equipped with a larger and more technologically advanced sensor.
• Richer colors: The sensor size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
• More dynamic range: Larger sensor captures a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
• Better low-light sensitivity: Larger sensor produces good images even in poorly lit environments.
• More complete view: Has a viewfinder with a larger field of view (100% vs 95%).
• Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.68x vs 0.50x).
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (920k vs 460k dots).
• More compact: Is smaller (139x80mm vs 130x100mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
• Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
• More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale value.
• More modern: Reflects 5 years and 4 months of technical progress since the 1200D launch.

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the M-E Typ 240 is the clear winner of the contest (13 : 5 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points when reflecting and deciding on a new camera. A professional wildlife photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a family photog, and a person interested in architecture has distinct needs from a sports shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the 1200D and the M-E Typ 240 in practical situations. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased.

Expert reviews

This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, and photographyblog). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.

Review Scores

	Camera Model						Camera Launch (announced)	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price (USD)	Used Price (USD)	Camera Model
	Canon 1200D»	+	-	4/5	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2014	449	-		Canon 1200D
	Leica M-E Typ 240«	-	-	-	-	-	Jun 2019	3,999			Leica M-E Typ 240
	Canon 4000D« »	o	-	3.5/5	-	3.5/5	Feb 2018	399			Canon 4000D
	Canon 1300D« »	o	73/100	4/5	3.5/5	4/5	Mar 2016	449	-		Canon 1300D
	Canon 750D« »	-	75/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	749	-		Canon 750D
	Canon 760D« »	+	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	649	-		Canon 760D
	Canon G9 X« »	+ +	-	4.5/5	4/5	4.5/5	Oct 2015	529	-		Canon G9 X
	Canon M10« »	-	-	-	o	4/5	Oct 2015	499	-		Canon M10
	Canon 100D« »	+	78/100	4/5	4/5	4/5	Mar 2013	549	-		Canon 100D
	Canon 700D« »	-	76/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Mar 2013	649	-		Canon 700D
	Canon 650D« »	+ +	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2012	849	-		Canon 650D
	Canon 1100D« »	80/100	69/100	4/5	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2011	449	-		Canon 1100D
	Leica M10-P« »	-	-	-	-	4/5	Aug 2018	7,995			Leica M10-P
	Leica M10« »	-	-	4/5	-	4.5/5	Jan 2017	6,595			Leica M10
	Leica M Typ 262« »	-	-	-	-	-	Nov 2015	5,195	-		Leica M Typ 262
	Leica Q Typ 116« »	-	80/100	4.5/5	-	4.5/5	Jun 2015	4,249	-		Leica Q Typ 116
	Leica M Typ 240« »	-	-	4/5	-	-	Sep 2012	6,950	-		Leica M Typ 240
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (-) not available.

The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

Specifications: Canon 1200D vs Leica M-E Typ 240

Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.

Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.